• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

White privilege poll.

Does (overall) white privilege exist in the USA (and in the 'west' generally) today?

  • Does not exist

    Votes: 4 10.0%
  • Exists to a small degree

    Votes: 3 7.5%
  • Exists to a moderate degree

    Votes: 6 15.0%
  • Exists to a large degree

    Votes: 26 65.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 1 2.5%

  • Total voters
    40
Oh, I disagree that it is impossible to see how white privilege affected individual people by telling their stories. My own family is a case in point: My grandparents and parents were poor during the Great Depression. My generation are all very solidly middle to upper middle class, in one generation. Largely because we were unburdened by the color of our skins. Heck, our country is rife with the stories of powerful, almost exclusively white people who are born into poverty and yet succeed beyond anyone's wildest dreams. It's The American Dream.
Your "almost exclusively white people" is far from reality. But it does fit the politicization of the topic. It serves those pushing their political narrative of white power to overlook (or deny) black accomplishments. The entertainment and sports industries are full of multi-millionaire black stars that grew up in poverty. Many major cities have black mayors and other blacks in high political office. Their are many blacks that have started and run both small and major businesses. As you say, "It's The American Dream."
A disinterested and nuanced thinker would see the term "almost exclusively" as allowing for black accomplishments.

Your hand-waved response serves the political narrative of "no racism here" in order to diminish the real effects of racism and its legacy in the USA.

Actually, on reflection, I agree with scepticalblip that that was probably an overstatement.

Still, I would say that the average white person has benefitted compared to the average black person. So I think toni's point essentially still stands. It's not that The American Dream has not been attained by black persons or is or even was completely out of reach for them, it's just that for many or most of them, it has been more difficult, probably quite a bit more difficult, especially in the past. Perhaps not so much now. But the accrued benefits for white people generally probably do amount to what might be called current, unearned advantages (privileges). Blessings maybe, if you're a white christian making a confused argument. :)
 
You are saying, in the same paragraph, that they both did and did not have the same categories as now.

I did not say they had the same categories as now.

If you interpret this text to say that Aristotle was arguing that there are only two kinds of people, Whites and Blacks....

But again, I did not say that, nor was that my interpretation.

Please do not try to put words in my mouth.

If the races have always been perceived the same way by all peoples regardless of context.....

I don't know where you got that from either. I didn't say it.

It must be Straw Man Sunday in your neck of the woods.
 
Plotinus comes to my mind - appears Ethiopian, born and raised in Egypt, spoke Greek. What race was he?
 
I don't think you can understand white privilege without incorporating the study of socioeconomic class. Absent class issues, the "white race" and "black race" would never have been invented to begin with. It is and always was a cynical idea, meant to divide the working poor against each one another and stave off rebellion against the aristocracy. The true power brokers have enough education to know that biology doesn't really work the way folk taxonomies of race would have you believe (and it shows, when you look at how they treat impoverished whites) but when you have a considerable economic stake in the perpetuation of a bad idea, it's not hard to convince yourself of it.

These days so called "white privilege" is almost all socioeconomic, not race.
 
These days so called "white privilege" is almost all socioeconomic, not race.
Those two issues are fundamentally interconnected, to the point that neither can be understood independently of the other. But your statement is also blatantly wrong, as poverty is not the only racial stereotype affecting non-white people.
 
I don't think you can understand white privilege without incorporating the study of socioeconomic class. Absent class issues, the "white race" and "black race" would never have been invented to begin with. It is and always was a cynical idea, meant to divide the working poor against each one another and stave off rebellion against the aristocracy. The true power brokers have enough education to know that biology doesn't really work the way folk taxonomies of race would have you believe (and it shows, when you look at how they treat impoverished whites) but when you have a considerable economic stake in the perpetuation of a bad idea, it's not hard to convince yourself of it.

The idea of different races is a social construct. It is only one of the concepts being used to divide the poor and the middle class against themselves for the benefit of the 1% top earners. That is the purpose of the culture wars too; law and order, abortion, gun rights, drugs, terrorism, religious differences, etc. have all been hyped to scare people and to divide people.

There is no biological evidence that supports the very basis of the concept of race, that behavior is different between people who exhibit the small differences that constitute "race." I don't think that there is anyone here on this discussion board that uses that argument anymore.

Now the argument that I hear most often now is that it is the cultures of some of the different minority races that are toxic and that condemns them to underachievement and poverty. I am still waiting for someone to tell me why there is a separate culture for the different "races," which I see is due to the majority culture imposing the toxic culture on minorities.
 
A disinterested and nuanced thinker would see the term "almost exclusively" as allowing for black accomplishments.

Your hand-waved response serves the political narrative of "no racism here" in order to diminish the real effects of racism and its legacy in the USA.

Actually, on reflection, I agree with scepticalblip that that was probably an overstatement.

Still, I would say that the average white person has benefitted compared to the average black person. So I think toni's point essentially still stands. It's not that The American Dream has not been attained by black persons or is or even was completely out of reach for them, it's just that for many or most of them, it has been more difficult, probably quite a bit more difficult, especially in the past. Perhaps not so much now. But the accrued benefits for white people generally probably do amount to what might be called current, unearned advantages (privileges). Blessings maybe, if you're a white christian making a confused argument. :)
A big problem that I see with such discussions is that they are based on incorrect assumptions. The stereotype of whites families generally used is that they are middle class suburbanites with above average income and black families are living in poverty. In the U.S. there are more white families living in poverty than black families living in poverty. I don't know what the actual percentage of each demographic group would be but the general stereotypes used is misdirection. The white racists complain that their taxes are being wasted supporting blacks on welfare using the stereotype of 'blacks are poor' ignoring (or not knowing) that most welfare benefits go to white families. Those on the left point to 'poor blacks' assuming racism is the cause of the poverty while ignoring (or not knowing) that most of the poor are white families.

Becoming a great success is an uphill battle for the poor (and even the middle class) regardless of their demographic group. The general (but mistaken) assumption that only blacks are poor in an "argument" makes it political propaganda.
 
Actually, on reflection, I agree with scepticalblip that that was probably an overstatement.

Still, I would say that the average white person has benefitted compared to the average black person.
What does the phrase "benefited compared to" mean? Does it mean the same thing as "benefited", or does it mean something different?

So I think toni's point essentially still stands.
Which point? Her point that her generation are all very solidly middle to upper middle class, in one generation, largely because they were unburdened by the color of their skins? How do you know it's largely because of that? Are pretty much all the people who are unburdened by the color of their skins whose grandparents and parents were poor during the Great Depression in other families also very solidly middle to upper middle class, in one generation? Because if a lot of those other families are still poor, then that would point to some family-specific cause being what her family's current prosperity is largely because of, rather than being largely because of any cause that was operating for the still-poor families the same as for Toni's family.

It's not that The American Dream has not been attained by black persons or is or even was completely out of reach for them, it's just that for many or most of them, it has been more difficult, probably quite a bit more difficult, especially in the past. Perhaps not so much now. But the accrued benefits for white people generally probably do amount to what might be called current, unearned advantages (privileges).
Which accrued benefits are you referring to? How does it having been difficult especially in the past for black persons to attain the American Dream benefit a white person?
 
Oh, I disagree that it is impossible to see how white privilege affected individual people by telling their stories. My own family is a case in point: My grandparents and parents were poor during the Great Depression. My generation are all very solidly middle to upper middle class, in one generation. Largely because we were unburdened by the color of our skins. Heck, our country is rife with the stories of powerful, almost exclusively white people who are born into poverty and yet succeed beyond anyone's wildest dreams. It's The American Dream.

Bomb asked the inevitable question: how do you know?

One can speculate that, if your grandparents were black, then you, your siblings and cousins would not be middle/upper-middle class. But to imagine that alternate family history, one has to believe that blacks face socioeconomic barriers that whites do not. And if your audience already believes that, then you're just preaching to the choir.
 
Oh, I disagree that it is impossible to see how white privilege affected individual people by telling their stories. My own family is a case in point: My grandparents and parents were poor during the Great Depression. My generation are all very solidly middle to upper middle class, in one generation. Largely because we were unburdened by the color of our skins. Heck, our country is rife with the stories of powerful, almost exclusively white people who are born into poverty and yet succeed beyond anyone's wildest dreams. It's The American Dream.

Bomb asked the inevitable question: how do you know?

One can speculate that, if your grandparents were black, then you, your siblings and cousins would not be middle/upper-middle class. But to imagine that alternate family history, one has to believe that blacks face socioeconomic barriers that whites do not. And if your audience already believes that, then you're just preaching to the choir.

Black people also face social pressures that white people do not--and are subject to those social pressures from a very, very young age. Black preschoolers are treated as less capable, more likely to need special education services, treated as more likely to have serious behavior problems, compared with their white counterparts regardless of socioeconomic station of either family.

Most of my schooling until I went to high school was at all white schools but in the first and second grade, there were a handful of black students. Even at 6 and 7, I could see that they were treated differently than I was. And at 7, there was an incident that led me to realize, years later, a small portion of the burden that a 7 year old black girl carried that I did not. I was allowed to be innocent of the potential consequences if we had been seen playing together. At age 7: they HAD to be aware of the potential consequences. Because however much a beating I would have taken at my home, it would have paled in comparison with what they would have faced--not necessarily at the hands of their parents who would have surely been aghast and terrified for their daughters.

The differences in perceptions of abilities, talents, personalities, predisposition for good/bad behavior, for violence, etc. start in the preschool years and are increasingly perceived to be true throughout childhood and into adulthood. Black children are perceived to be older, more sexually mature, more sexually promiscuous, less sensitive to pain or deprivation, less honest, less hard working, less capable of good and more inclined towards bad compared with white children. In the same classroom, where everyone is more or less of the same socioeconomic station.

How do I know? As a young child, my family was poor. I attended college on academic scholarships. As a young adult, I barely had enough money to pay rent and to eat--frankly not enough to eat every day and certainly not 3 meals. No matter where I went, into any department store or government building or whatever: I was always treated as though I belonged. My presence was never questioned. Only one time was I ever taken for a sales clerk, in an upscale department store where all of the salesclerks actually dressed far better than I ever could have.

My friends who were black? Were followed around stores, were questioned and harassed and treated as though they did not really belong, did not really deserve their place wherever it was.

If I put on my nice clothes and shoes, fix my hair, put on a little makeup and stroll.....anywhere: no one will think I don't belong. No one will think that I did not always have the money to afford the nice clothes on my back and shoes on my feet.

This is not the experience of black people. Even Oprah was told she could not afford a purse she wanted to look at in an upscale boutique in Europe. I've never had that experience although I assure you, I have been in the dressing rooms of lots of places I could not afford.
 
These days so called "white privilege" is almost all socioeconomic, not race.
Those two issues are fundamentally interconnected, to the point that neither can be understood independently of the other. But your statement is also blatantly wrong, as poverty is not the only racial stereotype affecting non-white people.

Related, yes, but not interconnected.
 
How do I know? As a young child, my family was poor. I attended college on academic scholarships. As a young adult, I barely had enough money to pay rent and to eat--frankly not enough to eat every day and certainly not 3 meals. No matter where I went, into any department store or government building or whatever: I was always treated as though I belonged. My presence was never questioned. Only one time was I ever taken for a sales clerk, in an upscale department store where all of the salesclerks actually dressed far better than I ever could have.

My friends who were black? Were followed around stores, were questioned and harassed and treated as though they did not really belong, did not really deserve their place wherever it was.

If I put on my nice clothes and shoes, fix my hair, put on a little makeup and stroll.....anywhere: no one will think I don't belong. No one will think that I did not always have the money to afford the nice clothes on my back and shoes on my feet.

What happened to your black friends? Did they join the middle class, as your family did, or are they still part of the working class? It seems like the only way this story has a point is if they failed where you succeeded. Not only did people disrespect them because they were black, but that it stopped them from getting middle class jobs.
 
How do I know? As a young child, my family was poor. I attended college on academic scholarships. As a young adult, I barely had enough money to pay rent and to eat--frankly not enough to eat every day and certainly not 3 meals. No matter where I went, into any department store or government building or whatever: I was always treated as though I belonged. My presence was never questioned. Only one time was I ever taken for a sales clerk, in an upscale department store where all of the salesclerks actually dressed far better than I ever could have.

My friends who were black? Were followed around stores, were questioned and harassed and treated as though they did not really belong, did not really deserve their place wherever it was.

If I put on my nice clothes and shoes, fix my hair, put on a little makeup and stroll.....anywhere: no one will think I don't belong. No one will think that I did not always have the money to afford the nice clothes on my back and shoes on my feet.

What happened to your black friends? Did they join the middle class, as your family did, or are they still part of the working class? It seems like the only way this story has a point is if they failed where you succeeded. Not only did people disrespect them because they were black, but that it stopped them from getting middle class jobs.
Uh, no. The question is whether privilege exists. Even if we accepted your absurdly irrational argument that a class of people who are assumed to be criminals upon entering a store are nevertheless equally likely to hired there and promoted into management as someone who isn't, that is hardly necessary to show that there is privilege. Being allowed to shop without being accosted and threatened is a privilege in and of itself, if that privilege is dispropotionately granted to some and not to others.
 
These days so called "white privilege" is almost all socioeconomic, not race.
Those two issues are fundamentally interconnected, to the point that neither can be understood independently of the other. But your statement is also blatantly wrong, as poverty is not the only racial stereotype affecting non-white people.

Related, yes, but not interconnected.

You must think you are making some kind of point, but I'm baffled as to what. How could race and class be related but not interconnected?
 
How do I know? As a young child, my family was poor. I attended college on academic scholarships. As a young adult, I barely had enough money to pay rent and to eat--frankly not enough to eat every day and certainly not 3 meals. No matter where I went, into any department store or government building or whatever: I was always treated as though I belonged. My presence was never questioned. Only one time was I ever taken for a sales clerk, in an upscale department store where all of the salesclerks actually dressed far better than I ever could have.

My friends who were black? Were followed around stores, were questioned and harassed and treated as though they did not really belong, did not really deserve their place wherever it was.

If I put on my nice clothes and shoes, fix my hair, put on a little makeup and stroll.....anywhere: no one will think I don't belong. No one will think that I did not always have the money to afford the nice clothes on my back and shoes on my feet.

What happened to your black friends? Did they join the middle class, as your family did, or are they still part of the working class? It seems like the only way this story has a point is if they failed where you succeeded. Not only did people disrespect them because they were black, but that it stopped them from getting middle class jobs.

I get it. Generations upon generations of racial bigotry should have no bearing on whether someone should be expected to be able to muster the self respect and personal integrity needed to get the type of job a white person gets just for the say so.
 
Oh, I disagree that it is impossible to see how white privilege affected individual people by telling their stories. My own family is a case in point: My grandparents and parents were poor during the Great Depression. My generation are all very solidly middle to upper middle class, in one generation. Largely because we were unburdened by the color of our skins. Heck, our country is rife with the stories of powerful, almost exclusively white people who are born into poverty and yet succeed beyond anyone's wildest dreams. It's The American Dream.

Bomb asked the inevitable question: how do you know?

One can speculate that, if your grandparents were black, then you, your siblings and cousins would not be middle/upper-middle class. But to imagine that alternate family history, one has to believe that blacks face socioeconomic barriers that whites do not. And if your audience already believes that, then you're just preaching to the choir.

Toni is talking in the first instance about past generations, in particular the early to mid-20th C (her parents and grandparents generations). It's well documented and accepted that blacks routinely faced numerous barriers during that time, to the point that only a denialist could query it with a straight face.
 
Related, yes, but not interconnected.

You must think you are making some kind of point, but I'm baffled as to what. How could race and class be related but not interconnected?

He has been trotting out this rubbish for years. It is one of the ways he engages in a form racism denial. Imo, it is not worth discussing with him, because he has consistently never acknowledged what is obviously the case.
 
Uh, no. The question is whether privilege exists. Even if we accepted your absurdly irrational argument that a class of people who are assumed to be criminals upon entering a store are nevertheless equally likely to hired there and promoted into management as someone who isn't, that is hardly necessary to show that there is privilege. Being allowed to shop without being accosted and threatened is a privilege in and of itself, if that privilege is dispropotionately granted to some and not to others.

I get it. Generations upon generations of racial bigotry should have no bearing on whether someone should be expected to be able to muster the self respect and personal integrity needed to get the type of job a white person gets just for the say so.

Maybe both of you should go back and read my first post in the thread, because you seem to misunderstand what I'm driving at.

ETA:

Toni is talking in the first instance about past generations, in particular the early to mid-20th C. It's well documented and accepted that blacks routinely faced numerous barriers during that time. To the point that only a denialist could ask 'how do you know'?

OK, I really must have mangled my point.

I don't need to be convinced. I am asking "how do you know" because the story Toni told just assumed that the listener already understood the effects of racism. It was basically "I'm wealthier than my parents, but I wouldn't have done this well if I was black, because racism".
 
A big problem that I see with such discussions is that they are based on incorrect assumptions......The general (but mistaken) assumption that only blacks are poor in an "argument" makes it political propaganda

Sure. And granted, Toni may have overstated things with the term, 'almost exclusively'.
 
Last edited:
Maybe both of you should go back and read my first post in the thread, because you seem to misunderstand what I'm driving at.

ETA:

Toni is talking in the first instance about past generations, in particular the early to mid-20th C. It's well documented and accepted that blacks routinely faced numerous barriers during that time. To the point that only a denialist could ask 'how do you know'?

OK, I really must have mangled my point.

I don't need to be convinced. I am asking "how do you know" because the story Toni told just assumed that the listener already understood the effects of racism. It was basically "I'm wealthier than my parents, but I wouldn't have done this well if I was black, because racism".

Sorry. Still confused. Do you mean you accept the general case but are asking how does Toni know the reasons and factors in her specific individual case? Why would that be important? The explanations in Toni's or any individual case would not change the general picture.
 
Back
Top Bottom